As Donald Trump took the stage in Arizona, many were quick to assume he had been bruised and battered by the latest debate. The media, yet again, echoed what they often do — pronouncing another political figure (this time Kamala Harris) the clear winner and suggesting that Trump’s time was up. But, much like 2016, the people who seem to make these calls probably haven’t spent much time talking to actual voters.
With the liberal media acting like Trump faced some “knockout punch,” it’s easy to forget how quickly narratives change. However, real voter sentiment may not easily fit into the conclusions drawn by certain pundits or the latest flash-polls we often hear about.
The Danger of Underestimating Trump’s Support
Political observers should be cautious before they start counting Trump out. A recent feature on Politico, for example, warns about the danger in writing off his support. Trump’s base might not always be the ones answering polls, but they’re enthusiastic, vocal, and ready to show up when it matters. And sometimes, as seen in both Michigan and Pennsylvania, there’s evidence suggesting many voters care less about how a debate is “scored” and more about how their daily lives were when Trump occupied the Oval Office.
One voter simply explained, “My life was better when Trump was in office. The economy was higher, inflation was lower.” That sentiment is powerful and widespread.
Is The Polling Model Broken?
There’s a legitimate question still hanging in the air: are the pollsters missing something again in 2024? We saw them miss in 2016. Some say it was due to “shy Trump voters”—people who didn’t want to explicitly say they were supporting him. This same issue may have resurfaced in 2020, and there’s real potential it’s happening yet again.
Dana Perino raised this when touching on the possibility that polling numbers may still not fully capture what’s happening on the ground. There are still voters who either refuse to declare who they’re voting for, or simply won’t answer polling calls altogether. This leads to potentially critical under-sampling.
And while data matters, when you start talking to voters, what resonates is straightforward. One Republican Senate candidate out of Wisconsin believes any bump Harris gets is temporary. These blips in the data may look encouraging for Democrats on paper, but they crumble when tested against deeper, more sustained support for Trump.
The Reality on the Ground
Major Garrett, a respected journalist, spent time traveling and speaking to voters off the beaten path. His take-away? Hardly any of them described themselves as undecided. This suggests a key reality of the current election cycle: many voters, even if they aren’t loud about it, have already picked their side. Garrett didn’t hear lukewarm responses about politics. Instead, he identified that Trump’s base remains solid, and doubters are few.
It’s a significant takeaway that stands opposite to some of the excitement being spread by media commentators. While some laughed, suggesting Harris “ran Trump over with a truck,” Garrett’s experience proved otherwise — voter sentiment remains far more complex than a simple debate winner or loser.
The Enthusiasm Gap
Interestingly, some claim there’s a huge enthusiasm gap between Trump and his opposition, whether it’s Biden or Harris. And this matters. Election Day turnout isn’t always about who gives the best debate performance. It’s about who gets their voters to show up. Trump’s rallies continue to fire up his base. Meanwhile, some wonder whether the same can be said of Kamala Harris or Joe Biden.
Jesse Watters made a keen observation too: According to him, if it weren’t for the expenses Trump’s campaign had to spend on legal battles — battles he claims are politically motivated — this election might have looked different. Watters even half-jokingly suggested that without those distractions, “this would probably be a 49-state landslide victory.”
While it’s impossible to know how much the legal cases surrounding Trump will impact the campaign, one thing is clear: Trump’s supporters don’t seem fazed. They blame the legal issues on a politicized system, and Watters suggests they feel as though their contributions are being used to defend Trump from a weaponized bureaucracy working against him.
Can Kamala or Biden Get a Lasting Bump From the Debates?
Jessica Tarlov added an important note towards the end. She questioned whether it’s really that big of a deal to declare a debate victory. Voter sentiment still seems too fixed. For Tarlov, while polls right after the debate might have given Harris some positive reinforcement, this alone isn’t going to guarantee who wins in 2024. Debates become part of the story, but they don’t seem to outright change minds anymore, especially in the swing states where it matters most.
Greg Gutfeld offered his own humorous take on the entire media scene’s reaction to Trump vs. Harris. According to him, liberals are simply thrilled they’ve moved from “a corpse to a cackler.” For them, it’s a relief. But he pointed out that being perceived as winning a debate doesn’t matter if voters care about real issues like unemployment, inflation, and crime rates.
Conclusion
If 2016 taught us anything, it’s that conventional wisdom doesn’t always win. Pundits proclaimed Hillary as the victor in 2016. They said Trump wouldn’t survive or grow a lasting movement. Now, they’re making some of those same predictions for 2024.
Voters, though, play by different rules. They may not care who won this or that debate. They care about what life was like when Trump was in charge. Don’t be shocked if some voters quietly say at the polls what they’re unwilling to say to pollsters.
The real story? It may not be showing up in the numbers just yet — but Trump’s support is anything but gone. “Undecided voters” may not look like what they did in previous elections, and public enthusiasm for Trump isn’t something to be discounted. This election will be a fight, but it’s one where Trump is far from out.
